NYC big-soda ban will cost customers more

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s ban on containers of soda larger than 16 ounces, which takes effect March 12, will also ban pitchers of soda at kid-friendly restaurants and prevent pizzerias from delivering a 2-liter bottle of soda with a pie, according to the New York Post. Short version:

Typically, a pizzeria charges $3 for a 2-liter bottle of Coke. But under the ban, customers would have to buy six 12-ounce cans at a total cost of $7.50 to get an equivalent amount of soda. …

“It’s ludicrous,” said Robert Bookman, a lawyer for the New York City Hospitality Alliance. “It’s a sealed bottle of soda you can buy in the supermarket. Why can’t they deliver what you can get in the supermarket?”

Families will get pinched at kid-friendly party places, which will have to chuck their plastic pitchers because most hold 60 ounces — even though such containers are clearly intended for more than one person.

Steve Barnes

54 Responses

“It’s ludicrous,” said Robert Bookman, a lawyer for the New York City Hospitality Alliance. “It’s a sealed bottle of soda you can buy in the supermarket. Why can’t they deliver what you can get in the supermarket?”

Good question Robert, I’ve been wondering about that for beer as well.

His argument is why can’t they deliver what you can get in the supermarket ya jackass. Beer is sold in the supermarket, and it is in a sealed bottle. As far as needing to be 21 to buy, I think they ID at the time of purchase? Many pizzeria’s sell beer idiot.

When Shop Rite does home delivery it doesn’t ship beer due to the age restriction. I’m not sure if Price Chopper does it though. If they didn’t Little Bobby may not have a good enough ID to get by the bouncers in a bar, but order it from a store online and then have a driver, who’s probably not trained to check ID’s, and weary from pinballing from Altamont to Delmar all day, may believe it. Then when the kid DUI’s and kills someone or himself people would wonder why there was no restriction.

So when the Mayor, City Council, GOV. or other elected official tell me “it for your own good and protection”, I will run as far and as fast as I can away from them. The law of unintended consequences plays a hard game. Keep your laws away from those that can think for themselves.

And next they will come for your 1.5 lb triple bacon burger served on a glazed donut “bun”. What about a bucket of KFC? (Not proud to admit it, but I have first hand knowledge of the damage one person can inflict on a bucket of chicken). Any entree that can plausibly feed 2 or more people? Most restaurant dishes these days are easily large enough for 2 meals, yet I am sure there are more than a few people joining the clean plate club at Delmonico’s. This is just ridiculous on sooooo many levels, I am kind of amazed it is becoming a reality. “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” (Edmund Burke)

Cihan – Michael Bloomberg was a life-long Democrat. By switching to Republican in the 2001 mayoral race, he got the endorsement of the very popular, out-going mayor, Rudy Guiliani. He also picked up the endorsement of the NYC Independent party.

It is no surprise that he has been a nanny-state politician all along, with his most recent ludicrous act being the big sugary-drinks ban.

Woodrow, your point in no way invalidates mine. He is not a Democrat, the Democrat are a party, a party that he no longer belongs to. As a politician, he is a socially on the liberal side, but economically on the conservative side. He’s no true blue Democrat, nor is he some kind of progressive.

Joe Lieberman is the same, he was a Democrat and is now an Independent. He does not exclusively adhere to the sum total of ideas from either party.

I consider myself a being far far left. That said, most of us who live and die with non stop media blitzes delvered by commercial outlets of everyspectrum absorb every nuance even though it is on “just for noise”, I know not the percentage of ads targeted for eating or drinking, but looking at John Q. Public we are getting fatter. Type 2 diabetes is a catastrophy which has both financial and medical implications for each and everyone of us. I applaud any leader who notices the impending catastrophy who attempts to put a begiinning of the end to the alarming abuse the likes of High Fructose Sugar whihc is in most processed foods today. Banning these large protions of soft drinks hopefully is just the beginning….. lord knows the suits who run these food mills don’t care about your or my health and I might suggest most people are eating/drinking themselves to death.

#10 – rav – Are you able to make a decision for yourself as to what you eat and drink?
_______

#11 Chad – Bloomberg is still mayor because people like raviolie think we need the government to tell us what we can eat and drink. The good news is that Michael Bloomberg is in his last term and can’t run again.

I speak for about 30% of the population who are obese. I thought I made it clear that being far left means everyone should be able to make decisions without gov’t intrusion. That said, fully aware that our medical system is the poorest in the Western World, we don’t need people who can no longer make a decision other than eat, eat, eat, and of course drink, drink, drink. Granted I’m of an older generation, but 32+ oz’s of soda loaded with HFCS
that john q. public is swigging at alarming rates…. ssomebody has to take the first step to speak to ccorporate power which is killing people with the processed food which permeates the country. Doesn’t anybody get it???

you may think “we do not need people who can no longer make a decison other than eat, eat, eat” , but who are you, or a billionaire businessman/politician for that matter, to make that judgement. And what the hell does corporate power have to do with this? Soda companies likely made the sodas bigger over the years due to consumer demand.

I would be much happier if the government would just tell me what I can and can’t eat every day, that way I don’t have to make any actual decisions about my own health. If they would just regulate bacon too, I might truly have a chance at being healthy. Maybe they also need to regulate my TV time so I don’t sit on my fat American ass every night watching Man vs. Food. (God, what the Internet needs is a sarcasm font.)

The sickening part of this discussion is how rooted in class discrimination it is – poor people can’t be allowed to buy a big gulp because of health implications, but rich people can clog their arteries at high end steakhouses eating massive portions of dry aged prime beef to their heart’s content (and eventual demise). You are cultured if you eat expensive gourmet food laden with fat and calories, but ignorant if you eat a microwave burrito that is likely just as bad for you.

For those crying about a “nanny state”, get a grip! Over 1/3 of adults and 17% of children (aged 2-19) in this country are obese. With obesity comes increased risks of heart disease, diabetes (insulin dependent and non-insulin dependent), arthritis, etc. This isn’t an issue that needs to be addressed at a higher level?

I am a supporter of the soda ban. It SHOULD be more expensive to buy crap food like soda, chips, etc. The fact that it’s cheaper to get a bag of chips then a couple of apples is obscene! This ban is a small step in the right direction. Numerous studies have shown that, when given larger portions, people consume more. With smaller portions of soda, people WILL drink less of it. It’s not rocket science.

Jenn – using your logic, why not ban all unhealthy food and only allow people to consume a government approved diet in quantities proscribed by certified nutritionists? Are you telling me you never ate too much Ben & Jerry’s or piled some pasta just a little too high on your plate? There are so many factors, it is just ludicrous to single out soda as the cause of an obesity epidemic. Are you in favor of banning all you can eat buffets? Foot long hot dogs? Foie gras? Artisanal cheese?

And I am pretty sure you can get a few apples for the cost of a bag of chips (or less) just about anywhere.

All the right-wing ranters, Jenn, are probably unanimously in favor of MALE politicians controlling women’s access to reproductive health care and in favor of dictating to them what they can and cannot do with their own bodies, yet they hyperventilate over junk food and soda. Stupid hypocrites best ignored or ridiculed.

It’s really laughable that “I” could be pegged as a right winger. My friends and family would be splitting their sides over the insinuation.

Seems it’s more your type who are hyperventilating over this issue.

Stop panicking! Soda and junk food are still going to be available. But if you want to get a gallon of soda, you’ll just have to get it in 8 (16oz) bottles, which will hopefully, due to the effort of opening the separate bottles, slow your intake of it a bit.

Thanks, Jenn. Polarization in this great (sic) country will destroy all that is good. forget about the average person being able to choose from good and healthy foods. Soon all of those who choose to put politics in front of good nutrition should just put a sock in it and got to Fox or MSNBC and get their fill of Applebees/Ruby Tuesdays/Olive Garden?TgiFcommercials, and let us not forget Subway…oh well some people get it, most would rather bash a good first step to “slim down” this country.

Your suspicion will soon be proven right when all the soda drinkers don’t lose any weight or get any healthier. The fat “soda gluttons” will still consume everything else in excess. And I support their right to do so. If you want to eat healthy portions, go ahead. If you don’t want to, fine as well. And who is going to monitor this law to make sure it’s followed? Wait for it………The FOOD POLICE! Only for real this time. Ridiculous.

Jenn, you should read with more comprehension. My characterization in no way, shape or form was directed at you. It was merely a response to your injunction to those who think the soda ban is The End of Civilization as We Know It and the illogic of defending the freedom to pig out on supersized sodas while restricting womens’ rights. I was on your side, but fuhgeddiboudit (second time in a week I’ve had to type it). You must admit that Andy’s response makes sense. And Bloomberg is a billionaire, so he’s hardly the second coming of Josef Stalin or Vladimir Lenin. Yet I think the law is dumb abd doesn’t get at the heart of obesity. What should be done is permit insurance companies to charge higher premiums against people who live unhealthy lifestyles. You get your social good with no infringement of people’s precious freedoms. And by the way, I got 3 organically grown apples for just pennies more than the price of a bag of chips.

The next law (either in NYC or Albany Co.) will probably require a vegetable with any fast-food purchase, I can see it now. The law after that will require the fast-food management to watch you eat to make sure you finish your vegetables.

Thanks Mickey for acknowledging that you can oppose this absurd ban without being characterized as some right wing extremist. FWIW, I voted 3rd Party / Independent this year after voting Republican most of my adult life.

Still waiting for a coherent/sensible response to my questions Jenn and Rav…

The development and onset of most modern day health related issues are influenced greatly by the food choices we make and other lifestyle choices we embrace or ignore like exercise, drinking and smoking. Genetics also plays a role but I think to a much lesser degree than most people believe – most of the time are genes are programmed to keep us healthy but are corrupted by how we live.

Anyway, for the mayor of one of the largest most important cities in the world to single out soda by controlling portion size to help curb obesity and diabetes is not only missing the point but is an abuse of power by the Mayor – at least be fair and go after every industry that manufacturers products that contribute to poor health. Why not force tobacco manufacturers to only make shorts like say 5 o or 6 puffs per cigarette? I am sure the incidence of lung cancer and second hand smoke would decline dramatically.

The solution is complex but in the end only people can change human behavior and that is where it has to start. Government ought to play more of a role in forcing all manufacturers to disclose all ingredients on food labels so we know exactly what we are buying. Furthermore, it should work with all local public school districts to require courses in nutrition and food including labels starting a young age so kids understand that juice is sugar and water. If properly educated, we’d all make better choices and in turn would force companies to make changes accordingly.

Our entire economic system is dependent on treating sick people as oppossed to education and preventative health.

As an almost 75-year Type 1 diabetic (OK Steve, you can add THIS one to my “harping” list), I find it very amusing that all of these posts are either political (how is this a political thing?) or all bent out of shape about how people aren’t being allowed to consume anything they want.

I haven’t been able to consume “anything I want” for my whole life, and I’m much happier for it – and in better health.

JB – unlike the soda ban, the reason for drug laws is not to protect people from drugs but to curb the crime that goes with illegal narcotics trade. Those laws do deter the public use of narcotics but that is not the reason for the laws. Last I knew, organized crime is not involved in the trade of soda.

And by the way, jeff, your (“you’re”?) knowlege of diabetes obviously hasn’t gotten to zero yet. The thing that makes people with diabetes irrational isn’t lack of insulin. It’s lack of food, or too much insulin.